Author
Topic: Talk to me about the Axman 2N. (Read 6058 times)

The Axman 2N is one of my favorite 'mechs from an aesthetic viewpoint, but also nostalgia. If it wasn't for the animated series, who knows if I would have ever discovered BattleTech. Without a doubt, however, it is not an optimal design. Many prefer the beefier, AC/20 of the 1N original. And my younger sensibilities -- wherein everything must be optimized -- always wanted to stick SRMs on it, remove the ferro armor for endo steel, get rid of the XL engine, etc. As I have gotten older, that has changed, but my love with the design has not... nor my bad luck with it.

Currently I am not bothered by imperfect designs. I look at the 2N and see it from within the meta of the game. Sure, you can put SRMs on in place of the LRMs, which makes sense in the context of the hatchet. Yet, maybe the LRMs work better than we give credit for. BattleTech is a game where players tend to gradually close their 'mechs into close combat. LRMs with shallow bins to soften an enemy and a hatchet with lasers for short range make sense. If I were to change things now, I think I would move the medium lasers to the left arm to match the miniature (because I am like that); switch out the large pulse laser for a standard or ER version and maybe move it to the CT; and finally use the freed tonnage from the large laser for a third ton of LRM ammo and a double heat sink.

But my desires to tweak the design are not really here nor there. My main question is, what does the forum think of the design. A waste of 'mech, underrated team player, or a diamond in the rough?

I believe that, for attacking advancing units, MRMs or MMLs may have been better. While the hatchet is a deterrent, it's not enough of one to validate a 7-hex minimum range with no ability to nullify it.

That said, the 2N is still a Catapult-style missile boat, which is certainly no laughing matter, it just isn't as effective as it could be. It's fully capable of taking care of itself, so it's still not terrible. If I was going to upgrade it, I would give it either an X-Pulse or ER Mediums and TSM. That'd be a missile boat that might be better off killed at range.

Inner Sphere LRMs and physical weapons should never be used on the same mech. If the medium lasers were mounted somewhere beside the same arm as the hatchet, it'd be one thing, but it actually loses damage output if it attempts to axe someone, and there's no sense it taking a melee weapon if you're not actually going to try to use it.

Logged

Our Officer's Club is better than your Officer's Club.

Warning: this post may contain sarcasm.

"I think I've just had another near-Rincewind experience," Death, The Color of Magic

It's not a bad self-bodyguarding firesupport unit. The MLs need to be moved, sure. Given my druthers, I'd trade the LPL for an ERLL and add two more tons of ammo. But throw it in a lance with Catapults, Crusaders, Archers, etc. and it'll provide a little extra throw weight of LRMs and be able to deal with anyone that tries to rush them. Not optimal, but still eminently usable.

Logged

Sunrise is Coming.

All Hail First Prince Melissa Davion, cowerer of Dainmar Liao, Creator of the Model Army, Rescuer of Robinson, Patron Saint of the Regimental Combat Team! May her light ever guide the sons of the Suns, May our daughters ever endeavour to emulate her!

* No, FASA wasn't big on errata - ColBosch* The Housebook series is from the 80's and is the foundation of Btech, the 80's heart wrapped in heavy metal that beats to this day - Sigma* To sum it up: FASAnomics: By Cthulhu, for Cthulhu - Moonsword* Because Battletech is a conspiracy by Habsburg & Bourbon pretenders - MadCapellan* The Hellbringer is cool, either way. It's not cool because it's bad, it's cool because it's bad with balls - Nightsky* It was a glorious time for people who felt that we didn't have enough Marauder variants - HABeas2, re "Empires Aflame"

It's a nice bodyguard for a fire support lance - it can contribute to the fire mission but if something gets in close it's usefully dangerous. The Hatchet works quite well in this context because I often find melee mechs are afforded more respect that perhaps they deserve.

It would certainly be better with the weapons moved around and an ER large laser would work better alongside the LRMs, but overall it's a useful mech if not an especially optimised one.

Logged

I fell out of favour with heaven somewhere, so I'm here for the hell of it now...

Being one of those earlier melee mech designs it very mediocre. It is, at best, a team player. Because of its lack of ammo and the fact they didn't move those medium lasers out of the same arm that holds the hatchet though I don't have very good things to say about it. It is a Fed Com mech that would be better off in service to the FWL to take advantage of SG LRMs. 4/6/4 is insufferably slow for a mech that carries a melee weapon. The closest that we get to a good Axman is a 3S. In AS, where ammo doesn't matter, it is a more well rounded mech than its predecessor.

since the design only exists because of the toy originally, why did the makers of the toy design it the way they did?

Pretty certain the AXM-2N wasn't created to match a toy. It first appeared in the back of the Battletech Compendium: Rules of Warfare, which, if not before, came out pretty much at the same time as the animated series. It certainly came out before any of the toys hit the market.

Logged

Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

I think it should keep both arm lasers. They ensure it has no blind spots in its firing arcs, and if it tries to mix it up close, odds are someone will eventually get the opportunity to get into one of those blind spots if you leave them open.

Inner Sphere LRMs and physical weapons should never be used on the same mech. If the medium lasers were mounted somewhere beside the same arm as the hatchet, it'd be one thing, but it actually loses damage output if it attempts to axe someone, and there's no sense it taking a melee weapon if you're not actually going to try to use it.

That is my biggest critique of it. WHY Put close in weaponry in the same arm the hatchet is.. You would be losing out on shooting OR hatchting if in close.. That said, i love the look of the mech..As far as LRMs and hatchets i disagree. If your mech's role is as a bodyguard for the Missile boats, token LRM-10, 15 or 20, can make you effective in assisting plinging other mechs while waiting for someone to try sneak in to backstab someone, THEN you go to the hatchet.

My only gripe is if you are going for a melee focused mech, why no TSM?

Logged

It's not who you kill, but how they die!You can't shoot what you can't see.You can not dodge it if you don't know it's coming.

I had a friend who had an unhealthy obsession with the Axman. Part of this was that he thought TSM (which he custom installed on his campaign mech) actually tripled damage, rather than doubling it, but even so its not a great mech, and I had to beat the pants off him a fair few times to convince him that a slow short ranged mech wasn't the best idea.

I'm not a huge hatchet fan at the best of times, but the Axman just makes too many mistakes. I get the coverage angle, but given a choice between the lasers and the hatchet, I'd chose the lasers nearly every time unless my heat was way in the red. If they'd wanted to pair the hatchet with LRMs, maybe I'd get that since the odds of wanting to use both would be a lot more ridiculous, but the MLs would have been a third of the mech's close in punch if they could be used in conjunction with the hatchet.

As for everything else, the LRM/AC20 switch is six of one, half a dozen of another. It moves the mech from one role it does only semi well into another it does only semi well. As a bodyguard, the hatchet is still the wrong choice, since most mechs that can slip past/through/around your lines to get to your missile mechs will be fast, and the Axman can't easily run down fast mech to employ its hatchet. The LPL is the right choice for that, for the same reason, so the mech is still usable in the bodyguard/support role, but not through any benefit of its signature weapon.

I do think that, as was pointed out, the hatchet is most useful against people who have too much respect for it. It has a nasty reputation in some circles, and if you can intimidate someone with a weapon that thanks to your ML placement you'll never use anyway, so much the better. But still better to just chose a mech that sinks that dead weight into armor or an SFE or more guns.

Logged

"For my military knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century..."

since the design only exists because of the toy originally, why did the makers of the toy design it the way they did?

The makers of the toy designed it to match the Axeman seen in the Battletech cartoon series of the early 90s. Search YouTube to see the series. There was also a Bushwhacker, Thor and a Mauler toys made by the same manufacturer. All were based on the show.

The show and the toy were developed hand in hand, I believe. Like many shows of the time, the goal was basically a toy line with a cartoon.And ultimately the -2N isn't an exact copy, too many missiles and too long of range compared to the show. Makes for a good design though. I prefer it over the -1N, the longer range means it works better for support.

Thanks for the responses, everyone. I do think I want to try and use it more and see what I get out of it, but I also play more Alpha Strike than anything else.

Some of the criticisms, while valid, I don't think are the end of the world for the 'mech. Although the three medium lasers are in the hatchet arm, and thus restricting it to choosing solid damage in one location or more damage, but spread out... eh. You have to assume that you would hit with all three medium lasers in one turn (potentially easy at short range), but that they would also all strike in the same location (possible, but unlikely). Although I agree it would be better to not place any weapons in the hatchet arm, JenniferinaMAD is right that it opens up firing arcs.

TSM would be nice, but we also have to deal with the meta of the story line. Yes, MMLs would be nice, but they won't happen in 3049 (regardless, a neat idea for a later era). TSM, as far as I know, was not widely available and was actually perfected by the Capellans in the era the 2N was first devised. Also, managing your heat to hit that sweet spot is really hard.

4/6/4 speed? Yeah, that does suck. Although in the Inner Sphere for 3049, it actually wouldn't be that bad. As the timeline advances, it definitely becomes a problem. Problematic against Clan 'mechs as well. Perhaps MASC would be a good choice to use for that... if you can free up the tonnage.

The Axman is a lemon design, I think there's no denying that. Though I may be biased, as I dislike physical weapons in BattleTech with a vengeance anyways. And I think the AC/20 is kinda overrated. Slow 'Mechs with exclusively short-range weaponry arrayed around an AC/20 always make me scratch my head. In this sense, the Axman is the middle child between the equally "narrow purpose profile" (i.e. tactically often worthless) Hunchback and Victor. I can get that same area denial bubble for the price of an UM-60L, at merely 30 tons.

In this sense, I like the AXM-2N a great deal better. It's still a questionable use for 65 tons of 'Mech, but at least it does have some range. I never realized this before, but Nikas_Zekeval is exactly right in that the AXM-2N fills the same niche as the Crusader. And while not great individually, I've found that a lance of Crusaders is a different thing entirely. The AXM-2N is even better in that it doesn't have the (-3R) Crusader's heat problems, and an energy-based short range loadout for better durability.LRMs are underappreciated at short ranges. Or rather, people are unduly afraid of firing them below 7 hexes. Why? At 5 hexes the penalty equals medium range, so is sort of a sweet spot for your entire weapons suite. And when used in pairs, just keep your 'Mechs 7 hexes apart from each other and then they can each snipe at the enemies that have closed with the other one.

Funny enough, I can completely disregard the 5-ton axe and still reach the same conclusion, which imho goes to show the axe is about as good to have as an AC/5, i.e. a waste of tonnage.

The Axman is a lemon design, I think there's no denying that. Though I may be biased, as I dislike physical weapons in BattleTech with a vengeance anyways. And I think the AC/20 is kinda overrated. Slow 'Mechs with exclusively short-range weaponry arrayed around an AC/20 always make me scratch my head. In this sense, the Axman is the middle child between the equally "narrow purpose profile" (i.e. tactically often worthless) Hunchback and Victor. I can get that same area denial bubble for the price of an UM-60L, at merely 30 tons.

A little disingenuous to say that an Urbanmech with a Boomstick serves the same purpose. I could only see that being true if you planned to have its lance sit and turtle all day. In a more fluid battle, however, the lack of speed might not make it seem like such a bargain after all.

Don't know if I would be so casual at discounting physicals either. Like the aforementioned Hunchback and Victor, the Axman is highly specialized for Urban and Close Assault. Quite a few players do think twice about tangling up close and personal with such a specialized infighter, whereas I doubt a UM-60L would generate quite the same threat factor.

I thought an Urbanmech was considered optimized for city and close in combat (hence its name) and that its when having to fight a mobile action (it can't as its basically a walking foxhole) or deal with opponents with long ranged weapons that it gets so easily blown apart.

Isn't the standard Urbanmech tactic to "hide behind a wall, fire a couple of shots, wait until that wall is destroyed by return fire and move slightly to another wall and repeat"?

My main question is, what does the forum think of the design. A waste of 'mech, underrated team player, or a diamond in the rough?

Its none of the 3 really.Its flawed as bad as many canon designs in "most" aspects.But it only has 1 REALLY bad flaw & that is the Arm mounted ML's. At least 2 of them needed to be moved to the Torso.I prefer it over the 1N since I tend to get my AC20 power from Victors most of the time.Sure the ammo is low, the FF v/s ES can be debated, XL is weaker, & the axe isn't the best use of 5 tons. But really the mech is quite usable & I'd have no problem having 1 in a heavy lance.

Logged

3041: General Lance Hawkins: The Equalizers 3053: Star Colonel Rexor Kerensky: The Silver Wolves"I don't shoot Urbanmechs, I walk up, stomp on their foot, wait for the head to pop open & drop in a hand grenade (or Elemental)" - Joel47Against mechs, infantry have two options: Run screaming from Godzilla, or giggle under your breath as the arrogant fools blunder into your trap. - Weirdo